I had hoped, in surveying the country, to be able to place the boundaries of the territories of the different tribes on the field maps, and with this object in view I ascertained the claims of each tribe as precisely as possible from representative men of the different tribes who accompanied me over the ground.[141] I found that in several places the tribal claims overlapped, and in consequence I have not inserted the boundaries on the general maps. But I was able to obtain a clear and definite idea of the various claims made at the time, and as this information was obtained on the actual ground, I propose to set it down here as being a useful basis for consideration if ever it is necessary to decide upon the question of rival claims.
On the small scale map[142] which forms [Plate XXVI,] I have shown the various claims as accurately as the scale will admit of, and a reference to it will enable the statements of claim to be generally followed; but as the disputed portions frequently concern somewhat small wadis, it will in some cases be better to refer to the larger scale maps on Plates [XV,] [XVII,] and [XVIII,] to follow the smaller details.
I would remark that there did not appear to be anything in the nature of a quarrel between the various tribes over the areas of disputed ownership, these areas being occupied indifferently by either tribe, or by men of both tribes living amicably together. It was only when I attempted to lay down on a map the precise boundary of each tribe that I found certain areas had two or more claimants. In the country south of the administrative frontier, the wells and vegetation are sufficiently abundant, in proportion to the population, for the question of ownership never to be a matter of heated controversy in ordinary years; and I am told that the present relationships of the tribes are so friendly that although each tribe would resent any statement as to ownership of its traditional grounds by the others, yet as a matter of fact no objection is raised to camels and sheep of one tribe grazing in the grounds of another, a give-and-take policy being usual. When I was at Halaib, Sheikh Batran Ali Tiut (of the Hamedorab) told me they never had disputes about grazing rights, as there was plenty of ground for all; but if a dispute should arise, he would no doubt be able to settle it amicably with his neighbours, by going to the place and hearing the evidence of the oldest Arabs in the particular district and letting custom and tradition decide the point.[143]
Boundary between the Ashabab and Meleikab.—This boundary is defined in the Ministerial Arrêté of June 25, 1902, to run along the Wadi Hodein from the sea to Gebel Abraq, and thence southward to Gebel Um el Tiur. The only difficulty in laying down this line on the map is in deciding which part of the great plateau of Gebel Abraq to take as the point, and which of the two Gebels Um el Tiur is meant.
With regard to Gebel Abraq (see the large scale map on [Plate XV]), the Wadi Hodein passes its south portion; but the context of the Arrêté, defines the wells of Abraq (Bir el Sunta, Bir Abu Dibesat, Bir Abraq, and Bir Gumbit) to be in the Meleikab area, and as these lie further north it is obviously necessary, in the spirit of the Arrêté, to take a point in the north portion of Gebel Abraq. From an examination of the map on [Plate XV] it will be seen that an easy and rational interpretation would be to regard the triangulation point, marked by a beacon on the plateau 1,700 metres north-west of Bir Abraq, as being a point on the boundary; the line from Gebel Um el Tiur to pass through this point northwards till it outs the Wadi Abraq, and thence the boundary line would lie along the course of Wadis Abraq and Naam to Wadi Hodein. This boundary fulfils the obvious intention of the Arrêté, and at the same time has the advantage of being easily traceable on the ground.
As to the two Gebels Um el Tiur, I have already mentioned this difficulty in connexion with the location of the administrative boundary (see [p. 74]), and have taken the higher of the two mountains of the same name as being the one intended.
Before leaving the subject of the Meleikab boundaries, it may be worth while to mention that at the time the Arrêté of 1902 was issued the country had not been surveyed; it was then thought that Bir Shalatein lay some fifty kilometres further along the coast southward than the mouth of Wadi Hodein, and the Arrêté defined the eastern boundary of the Meleikab territory to be the coast-line from Wadi Hodein to Bir Shalatein. But as Bir Shalatein is actually in the Wadi Hodein, the real result is that the Meleikab area ends in a point on the coast, and does not include any sea-board at all. The matter is not one of great moment, because the coast-plain for some distance southward of Wadi Hodein is very barren; but it illustrates the impossibility of defining boundaries without either going over the actual ground or having a reliable map.
The Hamedorab Boundary.—The Hamedorab claim their boundary to run from Bir Meneiga southward along the watershed of Gebel Gerf, along the east side of the basin of Wadi Diqdib to just south of Bir Baaneit, thence to the hill called Kilia Arib, thence to the hill of Eqrun, thence to the pass of Bani Sana; at Bani Sana the boundary turns south-westward so as to pass west of Wadis Hamida and Nubitra, then bends to the south-east passing west of Wadis Mashushenai and Dibir, thence eastward along the south side of Wadi Di-ib.
SKETCH-MAP SHOWING
TRIBAL BOUNDARIES